JUDGEMENT
Prasenjit Mandal, J. -
(1.) This application under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure has arisen out of the order dated June
1, 2009 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions
Judge, Fast Track Second Court, Diamond Harbour in connection with
Criminal Motion No.75 of 2008 arising out of the order dated March
5, 2008 passed the learned Judicial Magistrate, Third Court,
Diamond Harbour in Misc. Case No.330 of 2006 allowing the
maintenance in favour of the opposite party.
(2.) The wife/petitioner filed the application under Section 125
of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance for herself
and her child against the opposite party. Upon consideration of
evidence of both the sides, the learned Judicial Magistrate
allowed the application granting maintenance at the rate of
Rs.700/- per month for the wife and Rs.500/- per month for the
child with effect from the date of order. The husband/opposite
party preferred a revisional application which was allowed by the
learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Second
Court, Diamond Harbour, by the order impugned. Now the grievance
of the petitioner is that though the marriage between the two is
an admitted fact learned Additional District & Sessions Judge
allowed the revisional application on the ground that previously
the wife/petitioner was married to one Monoranjan Jatua and that
marriage was dissolved by an affidavit which was filed before the
learned Trial Judge.
(3.) The learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that
the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge has totally
misdirected himself in considering the affidavit which has no
connection with the Misc. Case under reference and the so-called
affidavit is totally inadmissible in respect of the matter in
dispute to the parties. So the learned Additional District &
Sessions Judge has committed gross irregularity in taking into
account of the said exhibit.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.